FreedomWorks - Sebeliushttp://www.freedomworks.org/fieldtags/sebelius
enSebelius: “Don’t believe what you’ve heard.”http://www.freedomworks.org/content/sebelius-%E2%80%9Cdon%E2%80%99t-believe-what-you%E2%80%99ve-heard%E2%80%9D
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/democracy-and-power-108" target="_blank"><strong>Democracy and Power 108: Obfuscation</strong></a><p><em>Wherever politics intrudes upon economic life, political success is readily attained by saying what people like to hear rather than what is demonstrably true. Instead of safeguarding truth and honesty, the state then tends to become a major source of insincerity and mendacity.</em> —Hans F. Sennholz</p><p>Politicians know their constituents are usually inattentive to the political process. Thus, the politician’s speech is seldom precise or logically reasoned. Seeking a favorable image, the politician talks in generalities, exaggerates and obfuscates.</p><strong>Sebelius:&nbsp; “Don’t believe what you’ve heard.”</strong><p>Let's remember what Americans heard prior to the Democrats passing ObamaCare.&nbsp; "If you like your insurance plan, you will keep it."</p><p>Three years later, meet Natalie Willes a young woman in California, who lost her insurance.&nbsp; Sadly, her ObamaCare options are <em><strong>more </strong></em>expensive and have an enormous deductible of $6,500, which only covers 70% after it's used. <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57609224/arrival-of-obamacare-forcing-insurers-to-drop-customers-with-low-coverage/" target="_blank"><em>CBS News</em> reports</a>:&nbsp;</p><p><em>"Before I had a plan that I had a $1,500 deductible," she said. "I paid $199 dollars a month. The most similar plan that I would have available to me would be $278 a month. My deductible would be $6,500 dollars, and all of my care after that point would only be covered 70 percent.</em><br><br><em>"I was completely happy with the insurance I had before</em>, Willes said.&nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p>Responding to hundreds of similar complaints, Secretary Sebelius, our Obamacare czar, continued to talk in generalities this week, which also continued to spew more insincerity and mendacity. “Sign up.&nbsp; Don’t believe what you’ve heard. Just check it out, look at the prices, look at the plans.”<br><br>Willes did exactly that and realized, "Now I'm being forced to choose from a bunch of new plans that I don't want to choose from that are all more expensive.”<br><br>Willes and millions Americans are beginning to understand the deceits and obfuscations employed by politicians of all ideologies and political parties.&nbsp; Shortly after World War II, Hans Sennhoz, who lived through the hell of Nazi Germany and subsequently migrated to America,&nbsp; wrote:</p><p><em>Wherever politics intrudes upon economic life, political success is readily attained by saying what people like to hear rather than what is demonstrably true. Instead of safeguarding truth and honesty, the state then tends to become a major source of insincerity and mendacity. </em></p><p>Hopefully, Willes, and millions of other Americans, will realize that a big government which promises everything also has the power to take everything...especially freedom.&nbsp; Hopefully, millions of Americans will soon embrace increased freedom by supporting a small, honest and competent government.<br><br>It's important for us to look at history, reflect on our government and improve the path we're taking.&nbsp;&nbsp; Please read this <a href="http://mises.org/daily/2625" target="_blank">article on Sennholz </a>from the Mises Institute (Sennholz strongly opposed what is currently occurring in America):</p><p><em>He has decried the welfare state as confiscatory and immoral. He has called inflation a form of theft. He has identified government intervention as coercion contrary to the true spirit of cooperation. He did this at a time when saying such things was taboo in the profession. Here again, he was keeping alive the spirit of Mises, and the spirit of truth. </em></p></div></div></div>Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:11:28 +0000teda58025 at http://www.freedomworks.orghttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/sebelius-%E2%80%9Cdon%E2%80%99t-believe-what-you%E2%80%99ve-heard%E2%80%9D#commentsThe NFL is Selling Obamacare?http://www.freedomworks.org/content/nfl-selling-obamacare-0
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Whenever President Obama is in a bind, he turns to his celebrity supporters. They prop him up when he’s wavering and help remind everyone how “cool” he is and that he's part of their team. With Obamacare implementation due to begin this fall, our government is bringing in the National Football League and its stars to bolster enrollment in the unpopular program.&nbsp;</p> <p>The marketing blitz for Obamacare enrollment, due to begin this summer, will tout the so-called benefits of the program. Why involve the NFL? "Because they see health promotion as one of the things that is good for them and good for the country," Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/25/government-looks-to-nfl-to-help-promote-obamacare/">said</a>. It seems that they may also be considering advertising with major-league baseball and the NBA to help the highly-<a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/nfl-pro-obamacare_737808.html">unpopular</a> plan gain membership.&nbsp;</p> <p>If it seems strange to you that HHS would need to advertise, consider how much they need young healthy participants in the system. Obamacare will be accepting millions of unhealthy Americans who require a great deal of expensive care, so they are <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/25/government-looks-to-nfl-to-help-promote-obamacare/%23ixzz2XG99fvEA">hoping</a> to attract 2.7 million people aged 18-35 to defray the cost. Typical of our out-of-touch government to use celebrity millionaires to ask everyday Americans to sign up for something they can’t afford. After all, it’s neither the government <em>nor</em> the wealthy who are going to get hit in the pocketbook by Obamacare.&nbsp;</p> <p>Recent studies have shown that the financial burden of Obamacare will fall disproportionately onto the poor. The Ohio Department of Insurance stated that individual premiums will likely <a href="http://connect.freedomworks.org/news/view/379455?destination=node/379455?awesm=freedo.mw_pF&amp;source=twitter">jump</a> by up to 88%, as “consumers have fewer choices and pay much higher premiums for their health insurance starting in 2014.” In relation to income, this is going to be much more expensive for those making less money, but HHS has it being sold by millionaires? Just as with every other aspect of Obamacare, this just doesn’t add up.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p></div></div></div>Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:02:46 +0000AmeliaHamilton57513 at http://www.freedomworks.orghttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/nfl-selling-obamacare-0#commentsSelling Obamacare — and Influencehttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/selling-obamacare-%E2%80%94-and-influence
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Author, comedian and podcaster extraordinaire <a href="http://adamcarolla.com" target="_blank">Adam Carolla</a> stumbled upon an important business insight: “I don't think I've ever seen pie advertised,” he said. “That's how you know it's good. They advertise ice cream and other desserts. They advertise the bejeezus out of yogurt, but I haven't seen one pie commercial.”</p><p>The dirty little secret about advertising is that, in general, the better the product, the less you have to advertise.</p><p>The best restaurant in town is packed every night without buying an ad. You chose your auto mechanic because your gearhead uncle swears he runs the only honest shop in town. And do you hear more about Harley Davidson from TV spots or from your co-worker who wears a Harley jacket and drinks from a Harley coffee mug while driving a Harley-edition truck?</p><p>Usually, the brands that advertise most are those offering forgettable quality at an unexceptional price with poor service. The need to tell you they’re great because no one else will.</p><p>Which is why no one was surprised when the Obama administration announced they’ll spend $150 million to promote the glories of Obamacare to the American people.</p><p>This latest PR boondoggle is aimed at community health centers, according to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “Health centers have extensive experience providing eligibility assistance to patients, are providing care in communities across the nation, and are well positioned to support enrollment efforts,” <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/may/9/hhs-rolls-out-150m-help-americans-find-coverage-un/" target="_blank">Sebelius said</a>.</p><p>If the so-called Affordable Care Act is such a blessing to the uninsured, Americans would be flocking to the nearest federal agency demanding their free slice of government pie. Instead, the plan is as <a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law " target="_blank">unpopular as ever</a> and dropping.</p><p>But the $150 million ad campaign is just the start. Sebelius is now shaking down health industry execs, asking them to kick in millions to market Obamacare. The same executives Sebelius is in charge of regulating.</p><p>Nice medical company you’ve got there. I’d hate to see all the new regulations I’m writing drive it out of business.</p><p>Even the Obama-adoring <em>Washington Post</em> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/10/budget-request-denied-sebelius-turns-to-health-executives-to-finance-obamacare/" target="_blank">seems nervous at the implications</a>.</p><blockquote><p>Sebelius must walk a tightrope in asking for money. Federal regulations do not allow department officials to fundraise in their professional capacity. They do, however, allow cabinet members to solicit donations as private citizens “if you do not solicit funds from a subordinate or from someone who has or seeks business with the Department, and you do not use your official title,” according to Justice department regulations.</p><p>“It sounds like the people she’s going to are people that are being regulated by her agency, I think that is definitely problematic,” said Meredith McGehee, policy director for the Campaign Legal Center. “That’s not a statement about the value of the law, but it’s a statement about using the power of government to compel giving or insinuate that giving is going to be looked at favorably by the government.”</p></blockquote><p>You can describe "socialism" as the collusion of government and business. You can use the same description for "corruption."</p><p>At a time when health care costs are draining the personal budgets of most Americans, selling “free” insurance should be as easy as pie. But citizens across the political spectrum know that Obamacare is a bad product that will only get worse.</p><p><em>Follow Jon on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/ExJon" target="_blank">@ExJon</a>.</em></p></div></div></div>Sun, 12 May 2013 13:44:35 +0000joncgabriel57324 at http://www.freedomworks.orghttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/selling-obamacare-%E2%80%94-and-influence#commentsWelfare: Obama, Sebelius and Subsidiarityhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/welfare-obama-sebelius-and-subsidiarity
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Mickey Kaus, of the <em>Daily Caller,</em> is an expert on welfare and understands how the Obama Administration has intentionally weakened the work requirement of the 1996 welfare reform act.&nbsp; The 1996 act mandated a “work first” approach, which focused on finding employment above everything else.&nbsp; Health and Human Services czar, Kathleen Sebelius, has intentionally and unilaterally issued a directive which would allow HHS to waive a “work first” requirement.&nbsp; As Kaus <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/08/the-case-for-romneys-welfare-attack/#ixzz236MHuDOd" target="_blank">reports</a>:&nbsp;</p><p><em>They (HHS) give their examples of the sort of waivers they want to grant, and they weaken work requirements.&nbsp; For example, HHS said states “may want to consider.”</em></p><p>Kaus offers his tanslation: <em>you’ll keep getting a welfare check for “training” or for “job readiness,” or for going to school for an “extended … period,” even though the law would otherwise say it’s time to get to work.</em></p><p>Why do this when welfare reform is so popular with the general public?&nbsp; Many studies show the reform was financially and culturally positive to its participants - mostly mothers and children.&nbsp; Employment created pride and job skills, therefore, diminishing a culture of dependency.&nbsp; So, why would the Obama Administration sneak a directive intending to dismantle “work first?”&nbsp;</p><p>The "welfare industry" does not like “work first.”&nbsp; Never heard of the welfare industry?&nbsp; Federal and state bureaurcrats, legal aid lawyers, training organizations, community colleges, research institutions, research academics and the like are considered the "welfare industry."&nbsp; <em><strong>All</strong></em>&nbsp; of which are receiving the majority of their financial support from the government.&nbsp; Almost universally, the welfare industry wants to reverse the 1996 reform.&nbsp; Thus, Sebelius and Obama have dismantled the law.&nbsp; (It's an election year, people.) This is a blatant example of politicians giving in to special-interest predators.</p><p>This is an abuse of power, which reduces Americans’ respect for our government and potentially reinstates failed and destructive welfare policies.&nbsp;</p><p>How do <em>We the People</em> stop this abuse of power?&nbsp; First, know this occurence is not limited to Obama and Sebelius.&nbsp; There are abuses on both sides of the airsle - by both Republicans and Democrats.&nbsp; Politicians and special-interest predators will always use conniving to manipulate the power of government for their respective monetary and political gains.&nbsp;</p><p>The solution is subsidiarity - a Catholic doctrine - where an intervening organization best serves the people in need at a local level.&nbsp; Here is the <a href="http://www.acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-6-number-4/principle-subsidiarity" target="_blank">Acton Institute’s definition</a>:</p><p><em>This tenet holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization, which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words, any activity which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be. This principle is a bulwark of limited government and personal freedom. It conflicts with the passion for centralization and bureaucracy characteristic of the Welfare State.&nbsp;&nbsp;</em> &nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>Even with the 1996 reform, the American welfare system - once well-intended - has morphed into a mass of rules and regulations that has little interaction between the recipient and the government. It is time to end federal government's command and control.&nbsp;</p><p>Needless-to-say the welfare industry and their complicit politicians will “yell bloody murder.”&nbsp; Their mantra will be, “Only a racist would dismantle the welfare system.”&nbsp;</p><p>It is painfully true that the coercive power of America’s government has oppressed many citizens - especially African-Americans and women.&nbsp;&nbsp; In the last half of the 20th Century, the federal government attempted to correct many of our social wrongs, and some of our welfare programs weren't touched because they were still beneficial to our society.&nbsp;&nbsp; Unfortunately, with the advent of the "Great Society" and ever-increasing federal money for dependency programs, the American welfare policies became wasteful and often counter-productive.&nbsp; Sadly, institutions involved in the system became corrupt and ineffective and the system stopped being helpful.&nbsp; America’s welfare system must be reconstructed.</p><p>In 1991, Pope John II confronted the universal problem of institutional decline when he took the “social assistance state” to task in his encyclical <em>Centesimus Annus</em>.</p><p>The Pontiff wrote that the Welfare State was contradicting the principle of subsidiarity by intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility. This <em>“leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending.”&nbsp;</em></p><p>Harmfully, Obama’s SOP for the welfare industry&nbsp; “leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending.” Exactly what the Pontiff described.</p><p>Again, America’s welfare system <em>must</em> be totally reconstructed.&nbsp;</p><p>One idea:&nbsp; States and local communities be allowed to opt-out of the federal system.&nbsp; Instead of sending their share of income-tax dollars intended for welfare, the local, political entity would retain the money and use it for a community-specific project.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p>Another lesson from the 1996 reform:&nbsp; The leaders of welfare industry yelled that President Clinton supported “a race to the bottom.”&nbsp; Just the opposite, states and local communities took good care of their neighbors in need.&nbsp; The principles of subsidiarity and real involvement by family, neighbors and religious organizations are absolutely essential for an effective and reciprical interaction with people and families in need.</p></div></div></div>Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:07:44 +0000teda55787 at http://www.freedomworks.orghttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/welfare-obama-sebelius-and-subsidiarity#commentsDiscovered: An UNLIMITED Obamacare Slush Fundhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/discovered-unlimited-obamacare-slush-fund
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Just when we thought there were no more brazen audacities left to report about in Obamacare, here comes a doozy. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">House Republicans have uncovered, tucked away in Section 1311(a) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), an UNLIMITED Obamacare implementation slush fund.</p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">That's right. Unlimited. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">An open tap on the US Treasury, this little gem -- discovered by Representative Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Energy &amp; Commerce Committee -- can be used for anything the President wants to spend taxpayer money on, under the guise of "actitivites related to establishing" Obamacare health benefit exchanges.</p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">Here's the relevant legal language from 1311(a):</p>
<blockquote><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">(1) PLANNING AND ESTABLISHMENT GRANTS.—There shall be appropriated to the Secretary, out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, an amount necessary to enable the Secretary to make awards, not later than 1 year after enactment of this Act, to States in amounts specified in paragraph (2) for the uses described in paragraph (3).</p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">(2) AMOUNT SPECIFIED.—For each fiscal year, the Secretary shall determine the total amount that the Secretary will make available to each State for grants under this subsection.</p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">(3) USE OF FUNDS.—A State shall use amounts awarded under this subsection for activities (including planning activities) related to establishing an American Health Benefit Exchange, as described in subsection (b).</p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">. . . </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">(4)(B).-- “No grant shall be awarded under this subsection after January 1, 2015.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;"><span style="line-height: inherit;">While this language thankfully shuts down the slush fund in 2015, it provides absolutely no limit on how much can be spent before then, and only the vaguest guidance on how it's spent. It's so vague, in fact, that any determined socialist could sail an ocean liner through it. </span></p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;"><span style="line-height: inherit;">And he is. </span></p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">Under Mr. Obama's approving eye, Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), Kathleen Sebelius, is already busy using this uncapped fund to seduce states into collaborating in the implementation of Obamacare. She's issued <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/ociio/initiative/grant_award_faq.html">nearly $50 million in grants</a> to help states "plan and evaluate" how they'll set up exchanges by 2014 as the law requires them to do.</p>
<p>That's just the appetizer. <a href="http://donberwick.com/">Dr. Donald Berwick</a>, the chief administrator of Medicare and Medicaid, has hinted at even more ambitious plans to tap the slush fund to bail out state governments, which are currently groaning under out-of-control Medicaid spending. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has confirmed that the "state-based exchange grants" fund is an "indefinite appropriation," meaning it's open-ended and requires no further action by Congress to be tapped by the President. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">If he wants to, Mr. Obama could increase the cost of his health care law by not just billions, but <em>hundreds </em>of billions, of dollars, unilaterally. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">As you might guess, some in Congress are not sitting still for this. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">Next week, the House of Representatives will vote on a bill drafted by Mr. Upton, <span style="color: #000099;"><a href="http://thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.1213:" target="_blank" class="external" style="color: #3d5459; text-decoration: none;"><strong><span style="color: #000099; text-decoration: none;">H.R. 1213</span></strong></a></span>, to shut off this particular tap and weld it shut. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates Chairman Upton's bill would save taxpayers about $14 billion over the next 10 years; but this is only a guess on the agency's part. The savings could be much greater, because, as we've said, the slush fund is not subject to any controls or meaningful limits. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">Under our Constitution, only Congress has the power of the purse. To formally delegate to the President the power to appropriate funds from the Treasury without stint or limit breaches the separation of powers in fact, if not in form. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">In short, Section 1311(a) of PPACA is a dangerous, irresponsible, and arguably unconstitutional delegation of money and power to the Executive Branch.</p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">Regardless of one's opinions about government-run health care, surely all Americans can agree that this slush fund gives the President -- any President -- too much power. </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">The vote is next Tuesday, May 2nd. To learn more about this bill and related issues, visit our <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/repeal-obamacare-war-room">Obamacare Repeal War Room</a>.</p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;">Or go straight to our petition page to <a href="http://action.freedomworks.org/4380/tell-congress-end-obamas-unlimited-obamacare-slush-fund/">send an email to your representatives</a>.</p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;"><em>[Update: On May 3, 2011, the House passed H.R.1213 by a vote of 283 to 138. It went over to the Senate. <a href="http://action.freedomworks.org/4380/tell-congress-end-obamas-unlimited-obamacare-slush-fund/">Urge your Senators</a> to schedule a vote on the bill.]</em> </p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;"><em>Dean Clancy is Freedomworks's Legislative Counsel and Vice President, Health Care Policy. </em></p>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; line-height: inherit;"><em><br /></em></p>
</div></div></div>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:52:16 +0000Dean Clancy54802 at http://www.freedomworks.orghttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/discovered-unlimited-obamacare-slush-fund#comments